It’s not that Trump is necessarily immune – it’s that if this kind of thing matters in the election, then it will harm Trump far more than Sanders, because Trump is guilty of it more often than Sanders, and much more recently than Sanders. If rape and sexual assault matters, then it will harm Trump far more than Sanders.
I recognize that this could be a real line of attack against Sanders, I’m just skeptical that it’s somehow obvious or self-evident that this is enough to sink him and make him unelectable (which is the conventional wisdom AFAICT, both out in the media and on this board). It’s a legit worry, but IMO it’s not as bad as the legit worries for all the other Dem candidates.
It’s just not really something you can make a straight equivalence. They have different core supporters and different reluctant voters. Praising dictators isn’t going to have the same effect on their respective groups.
But the big difference is how/why they praise dictators. Trump is talking about how these guys get shit done, awesome executives. Bernie is talking about how great it was they redistributed the wealth so well. These are different messages.
I know it’s not scientific, but I hear a whole lot of people saying “I don’t like Trump one bit and would vote for a Democrat this year–unless it’s Sanders or Warren.”
Now, maybe they’ll never vote for a Democrat, I don’t know. But it concerns me.
Personally, Bernie’s ideas are fine with me. (I worry about his effectiveness, not his policies) But I have learned since 2016 that I am not a typical voter.
The main line of attack will be “Bernie is a socialist who will destroy the economy and take away your private health insurance”. It will be highly effective and may well win the election on its own. A secondary line of attack will be that “Bernie hates America and has palled around with left-wing dicators for decades” It will be moderately effective with older voters.
There is some veteran Republican attack artist out there who learnt his trade at the feet of Lee Atwater who is licking his lips at the prospect of taking on Bernie. Bernie’s young fans are mostly ignorant about politics outside the blue bubble and they are completely unprepared for the shitstorm that will engulf their hero if he does in fact become the nominee.
Depends. Is social security, farm subsidies, NASA, the highway system. medicaire and just about every other federal government program about the same as socialism?
Thing is all those programs, even though they are government run, use local private contractors.
And that is the way I think it should be. I for one, would not want to go to a “government” hospital. However I dont have a problem with one that is private run yet bills the government like medicaire does.
But they did; most of us call ourselves liberals and the Repugs make that into a term of opprobrium. Not that we are (classical) liberals, any more than Bernie is a classical socialist. He is a social democrat, just like FDR. Don’t forget that he is a self-decribed socialist and yes, that will hurt him. The Repugs will call any Democratic nominee a socialist (hell, if Romney ran as a Democrat they would call him a socialist and bring up Romneycare in Mass).
The funny thing is that there is probably a majority in favor of each of Bernie’s specific proposals, but the whole will be labeled socialist and people will reflexively vote against it.
This is exactly my experience talking to friends and acquaintances, the ones who haven’t drunk the Trump koolaid. They generally vote Republican, but really don’t like Trump. They could see themselves voting for a Democrat, but not Sanders or Warren, that’s just too far left for them. I can see it myself. I’ve voted Democrat and Republican, depending on the person and the office. Didn’t vote for Trump. I can see myself really supporting the more centrist candidates, and will likely vote for whomever goes against Trump, but in terms of having more of an overall chance of success, I really hope it’s not one of the far left candidates. That would likely leave a lot of voters who want someone other than Trump, but not THAT guy. And I want the best chance of getting rid of the orange menace.
FWIW my mom has always been a Democrat but lives with my Trump-obsessed, former-democrat, “in it for the lulz” dad so she is exposed to a ton of really terrible and toxic media. You can tell she thinks Trump is a piece of shit and generally disagrees with most of the shit that Republicans are doing these days, but he has asked me more than once “what about socialism? Look what it did in Venezuela.” I’ve told her several times that I’m a Democratic Socialist.
From where I sit, “socialism is terrible and socialists are terrible” is the last little toehold that Republicans have over people who Just Aren’t Sure. Mom’s all for reproductive rights, LGBTQ rights, welfare, smart immigration reform, smart gun control but, you know…what about Socialism?
It’s going to take a lot of graphics comparing Sweden and Venezuela to convince all those people like my mom that we can expand social programs and still not have a coup.
Quote: *“It’s also possible that the public’s reservations about Sanders are genuine, but a whole lot of voters won’t let those concerns outweigh their desire to vote against the incumbent president. Former Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.), for example, after ending his long-shot GOP presidential bid, was asked on CNN recently whether he’d vote for Sanders over Donald Trump. “I would rather have a socialist in the White House than a dictator,” he replied. I suspect Walsh isn’t alone.”
*
Without equating Trump and Hillary, this is essentially the same sentiment that propelled a lot of traditional R’s to vote for Trump in November 2016. The feeling that “my guy is bad but the other side’s candidate is worse.”
Since I’m not bringing cites or bookmarks (or pie) (but have lived almost long enough to collect Social Security), In My Humble Opinion:
Praising the leader (dictator, authoritarian) you’ll be dealing/negotiating with is different than praising that government/system (communism, socialism).
(send a stamped, self-addressed envelope for the 2 cents I put in)
Andy, what’s your evidence that the kind of voters who live in the Upper Midwest and voted for Trump in 2016 but then for moderate Democrats in the 2018 midterms (because let’s face it, these are the voters who matter this fall) already know about Bernie’s praise for communist dictatorships? It’s never mentioned on network TV news, as I noted; so how exactly would they know?
No, this is a fundamental logic fail. You don’t seem to get that there is a double standard in US politics as concerns the two parties, even though plenty of people ITT have tried to explain it to you. If Obama were running for reelection in 2012 with all the skeletons in his closet (or out in the open) that Trump does, he would have lost to Romney by double digits instead of comfortably winning reelection.
Furthermore, Trump has in fact been hurt by his being a garbage person. No president in history has had as consistently low approval ratings as he has. And it might be possible for any Democrat to beat him this fall, even Bernie, due to this “lesser of two evils” dynamic.* But that won’t be available for Bernie in the 2022 midterms, or (necessarily) for his 2024 reelection battle.
This trope that because Trump has lowered the bar, Democrats can just barely clear that newly lowered bar, is both ethically troubling and politically dubious. But it’s clearly part of Bernie’s calculation in figuring he can go back on his promise to release his full medical records, just like Trump went back on this promise to release his tax returns.
You didn’t quote an excerpt, and the link immediately started blaring an autoplay video that I could not clear away, so I quickly closed the tab. :dubious:
*It’s worth noting that if we now had President Jeb or Rubio, and people had the same level of consumer confidence in the economy (a recent Gallup report showed that it is far higher than it has been during any president’s reelection campaign over the past several decades), Democrats would be toast. No chance. But Bernie’s pitch is uniquely ill-suited for this moment, as it is predicated on people supposedly facing dire economic straits! :smack:
I live in a relatively small precinct in Iowa (we had 57 people at our caucus). I convinced 2 former Trump voters to caucus for Pete, and had 2 others say that they would vote for him if he were the nominee. All 4 of them said that they wouldn’t support a progressive Democrat.
I haven’t made this specific claim – I’ve said that those voters who really, really care about fighting socialism already know that Bernie is a self-declared socialist. I don’t have data for this, and you can disagree. This is not a data-based discussion – there is no data that tells us who is more or less electable. It’s all guessing. I’m telling you what my guess is based on.
Those who really, really hate communism/authoritarianism and prioritize opposing communism very highly, already know that Bernie’s said dumb things in the past about communists. Because people who care about this stuff see that kind of thing on Facebook, or Fox News, or hear it on the radio, all the time.
And if any of these folks voted for Trump, and still support Trump, then obviously they don’t actually really value opposing authoritarianism or praising authoritarians. I don’t buy the special double-standard rules below – I think we’d just never had anyone like Trump before, and it turns out lots of Americans really, really like that kind of vulgarity and awfulness. It’s a plus for them.
I don’t think it’s a double-standard (see above) – his supporters like this stuff. They never cared about the deficit, or “family values”, or decency, or fighting authoritarianism, or whatever – they cared and still care about angering liberals and supporting racism. That’s what they value more than anything, politically speaking. It’s not that Trump lowered the bar – Trump demonstrated that the bar was already that low. He demonstrated that these voters really just never did care about this stuff. I don’t buy that they’re suddenly going to care about something that Bernie does when Trump has done it much more recently, and in a much dumber way. They might pretend to, but that will be an excuse for what they really want to do anyway.
As far as the medical records, AFAICT he released pretty much what every other candidate did – doctor’s reports noting that he’s in good health, with some level of detail. He didn’t release EKG reports and blood chemistry results, which would be far beyond what most candidates do. I don’t think this will matter in the general election unless Bernie has another health scare.
I’m pretty sure Lamoral was hinting that “progressive” has come to pretty much mean what “socialist” means/meant (for some), and while it does have somewhat unsavory connotations for some conservatives, it’s not a vote-killing, knee-jerk-response-provoking word like “socialism,” especially not among on-the-fence “independents.”
I suspect that it will be somewhat damaging as so many people who weren’t poli-sci majors think of Socialism as being, as Bill Maher put it, “Communism’s gay cousin”.
A better question might be why so many young people, as polls have shown, don’t have a problem, with the label. I remember a system that we used to have, call it “Democratic Capitalism”, where a kid, even from the poorest of families, which I was, could, with loans and grants, obtain a college education and not be in hock for the rest of his days. You could get a job that would provide not merely an income, but an actual career with the possibility of advancement. Heck, you’d even get decent health care and, when you were done, a pension. Today’s young people know that that ain’t in the cards for them. The wonder isn’t that they’re “Socialism friendly”. The wonder is that they’re not manning the barricades.
This kind of talk about “manning the barricades” just doesn’t square with what Gallup is telling us about public opinion:
The percentage saying they are better off financially than they were three years ago is 61%. The previous four times an incumbent was running for reelection, going back three decades, that number was 50, 50, 50, and 45.
This is exactly the wrong time to be running on economic gloom and doom talk, which just isn’t credible, and promises of radical change, which sounds risky. Democrats should nominate someone safe and boring and promise to bring back dignity to the Oval Office, and not to do anything too disruptive to the economy.
It’s not a problem, because it doesn’t put him on the defensive. He just replies “what I mean by socialism is…” and segues back into talking about the highly popular policies which he is advocating. The whole point of the GOP propaganda machine is to draw attention AWAY from the issues and onto personalities. Bernie is expert at not letting that happen.